On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 11:34:53PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 12:13:58AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 01:06:20PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > Hm, yeah. So the brave new world will be that bugs won't be listed as
> > > fully closed in unstable until all architectures are in sync?
> > Point. Having a 'arch=source' option might be a better default then? If
> > it's possible, I'd like an 'arch=*' or 'arch=all' option, though.
> 'arch=source' is there for support for src=foo queries, but probably
> won't quite do what you want because it deals with versions of source
> packages. I could invent a couple of new pseudo-architectures for this
> easily enough though: let's make 'arch=default' (or nothing) show the
> bugs corresponding to the current source package associated with
> whatever you're asking for, and 'arch=*' show the bugs open across the
> board.
Sounds good.
> > > I think, then, we let the 'found' bugginess state win, then 'fixed',
> > > then 'absent', so when listing bugs across architectures the buggiest
> > > one wins. I've got untested code for that now.
> > I've no idea what you mean here.
> 0.1-1 s390: bug wasn't even reported here
> 1.0-1 mips,mipsel: bug was found here, but not fixed
> 1.0-2 alpha,arm,i386: bug was fixed here
> ... then you want to report the bug as 'found', since that's the most
> conservative (buggiest) option, etc.
Aha! Yes, indeed.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``Is this some kind of psych test?
Am I getting paid for this?''
Attachment:
pgpHQqaKqey8U.pgp
Description: PGP signature